I’m reading the Old Testament, which is a mixed bag. There are some lovely parts and others which I feel are pretty worthless. Although some are historically important, I think. Just finished Jeremiah and boy, did he wear me out with his negative attitude. I’m now into Ezekiel. Ezekiel is a poet. There’s a beauty to his writing, although a lot of it is the same kvetching to God’s chosen people about their shortcomings as Jeremiah. But yesterday, I read this and it hit me. I’ve read the Old Testament I don’t-know-how-many times but never noticed this:

Ezekiel Chapter 4, verse 16: ” Morever he said unto me, Son of man, behold, I will break the staff of bread in Jerusalem and they shall eat bread by weight and with care; and they shall drink water by measure, and with astonishment:
And 17: That they may want bread and water, and be astonied one with another, and consume away their iniquity.”

Which made me think of the sin-eaters. I’ve seen those shows on TV and read stories about the sin-eaters and been rather grossed out. Somebody comes in after a person dies and eats a lot of food which eats the dead person’s sins.

Never bought that as a concept. But the reference to sin and bread and water made me think there’s another way to consider the sacrament. Besides re-committing ourselves to Jesus and a life of righteousness, are we consuming our sins? I kind of like that concept. And I’m going to think about it from now on as I take the sacrament.

One other thing I loved that I read last week is from the Book of Mormon. I’m reading both, because in the middle of the year last year, the bishop asked us to read the Book of Mormon and so I said, “fine.” And read this nugget from Alma, chapter 19, verse 23:

“Now we see that Ammon could not be slain, for the Lord had said unto Mosiah, his father: I will spare him, and it shall be unto him according to thy faith–therefore, Mosiah trusted him to the Lord.”

This, too, struck me. I pray for my kids every day, but we especially worry about our Jared. He drinks like a fish, smokes like a chimney, is 6’2″ and weighs 125 lbs. He has questionable friends and lives in a remote area where anything could happen. He drives to work at 3 in the afternoon and home again, 40 miles, at 3 am. He’s impulsive and obnoxious and angry and regularly gets in bar fights and sports black eyes. Anything could happen. Obviously, he’s not, as Alma, repentant and preaching the gospel and doing the Lord’s work. However, perhaps according to our faith, the Lord will be mindful of him. So, like that scripture, I’m going to trust him to the Lord.

I think one of the things I love the most about your posts is the honesty about life that you share with us. I also love your willingness to show your healing. Even when things look pretty bleak you manage to turn toward God instead of away. Thank you for being strong enough to admit weakness so I can celebrate every victory you have. I have gained a lot of strength to face my own life because of you.

How did the temple sealing go? I sure hope it was the most wonderful day, ever.

“kvetching?” Are you throwing in the Yiddish just for an Old Testament-y effect? It works.

Your sin eater reference reminded me of a woman we know who’s terminally ill mother sent her out as a young teen to get pregnant and have a baby, so that her mother could see her grandbaby before she died. The only inheritance her mother left her was misery (I suppose it didn’t have to be misery, but in this case it was). The story was that the mother felt that she hadn’t accomplished what she had wanted in life. And somehow the only way her daughter could give her any peace was to show her physical evidence that at least she would have a genetic heritage. Kind of highlights not just the futility of deathbeath absolutions for the dying, but the damage done, to self and family, of the sin itself during life.

Thank you, living in zion. I wish I could tell a different story. Hindsight is 20-20 and regrets are a bitch. The sealing was wonderful! Such happiness. Only Bill and I were there for Sarah from her side of the family. None of our other children are active and the active relatives don’t have recommends! Although there are only a few of those, too. But I thought, “Mom is here, and Dessie. Her brothers, Davey and James.” And then had the overwhelming conviction that the room was crowded with Sarah’s loved ones and family that we couldn’t see. Including that little baby spirit soon to be born? (It’s a boy!)

Mac, I always use Yiddish, it’s not purposeful. There are just some words that seem to describe what I’m trying to say. I didn’t even know that was a Yiddish word! (One word in particular that I use rather often has turned out to be a vulgar term, but oh, so fitting.) I know “mitzvah” and “meshuggah” (me) and a few others that I basically think are great words.

Have you read Jeremiah? I kept thinking of that guy in Iraq during the invasion, the media minister?–who kept reporting everything was fine over and over. Except Jeremiah was preaching hell and damnation. They could just have had put “Jeremiah says you guys are screwed.”

That “consume away their inquity” part is a bit mistranslated, so I can see how it may have led to the “sin eater” thing. “Consume” is meant in the sense of waste away. They’re wasting away, literally due to the famine of food and water, but overall as punishment for their sins.

The bread by weight, and water by measure indicates rationing.

Most translations render verse 17, waste away (or pine away) in or because of their inquity.

The Jewish Tanakh renders it “heartsick over their iniquity”.

When we were studying the O.T. in Gospel Doctrine, I had a 4-way parallel Bible that I’d reference for hard passages, or ones that didn’t make sense. The Amplified Bible is another good one. Online, http://www.biblegateway.com gives access to several translations. One of my favorite readable translations, my first Bible that was “mine”, was the Jerusalem Bible, that I got when I was 14. It’s a paraphrase, but still very close in meaning.

Paul also said it was a shame for women to speak in church, and if they could learn anything at all, they should ask their husbands, at home, 1 Cor 14:34-35.

34. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.

35. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

So there’s a lot in there that is not according to current doctrine.

I like to use that passage with those who accuse Mormons of not following the Bible. I think the only Christian religion that follows that part might be the Amish.

“Do you believe the ENTIRE Bible?”

“No, and you don’t either.”

“Like what?”

“1 Cor 14: 34-35. Do women speak or teach in your church?”

And the KJ translators just weren’t as good with Hebrew as they were with Greek. Look at all the “OR” “IE” and “HEB” footnotes in the LDS edition of the Old Testament, that are needed to clear up a lot of meanings.

#6 – I don’t know if this helps, but God sent the bears after Elisha cursed them in the name of the Lord. So Elisha cursed them and the Lord decided to send the bears according to that scripture. It raises a bit of a different question… but ultimately at least in that case it came down to the Lord doing something questionable, not the prophet.
#7 – I think you can believe the entire bible and have no problem with that verse while still preferring women to speak today. Believing in the bible and believing everything that was done in the bible then must be done now are two different things. Otherwise, I’ll get back to building my ark, stacking stones around my house with one hand and a sword in the other, and putting hot coals on my tongue in my spare time.

I think you just made Bookslinger’s point. Obviously we allow women to speak in church. So then the reason we don’t follow that particular passage is:
a.) The bible is outdated and no longer applies.
b.) That verse was poorly translated (how do we know?)
c.) That verse is superseded by modern revelation.

Ron: “Why” is irrelevant to the question of whether it happened or not. “Why” has to do with motive and thought processes, things which can only be guessed at forensically (or revealed by God if He so deigns) especially since if someone did intentionally make changes, it is unlikely they would have publicly admitted to changing the word of God.

However, the fact that existing texts (codices) illustrate that changes, intentional or not, crept in, is objectively observable. The Septuagint (a Greek version of the O.T. created by devout and respected Jews of the time) and the Dead Sea Scrolls also show differences with the standard “Masoretic” text.

There is also the Apocrypha, which people don’t seem to agree on whether it should be officially in the O.T. or not. Joseph Smith said no, the Catholics say yes.

Annegb: Apparently, there’s more to the story that we are not being told of. As I see it, a prophet of the Lord is not going to curse someone in the name of the Lord unless it’s the Lord’s will. The Lord didn’t sic the two bears on the “youths” just because Elisha said so. Elisha said something (in the name of the Lord) because the Lord must have inspired him to. If Elisha’s curse was not the Lord’s will, the Lord would have been under no obligation to carry it out. Priesthood holders, from elders on up to prophets cannot exercise any effective spiritual power unless it coincides with God’s will. Some would even say that a priesthood holder has no power “in and of himself”, that he’s only the mouthpiece, and that although the “power of the priesthood” may be “effectuated” via the elder’s or prophet’s words, the actual “hand on the control knob” is the Lord’s.

Also, check out the Amplified Bible’s translation:http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=2%20kings%202&version=AMP
“little children” may also be translated as young but maturing and accountable boys. And “go up” is a mocking reference to going up to heaven like Elijah did. They’re mocking him to translate himself, and leave in the manner of Elijah. It could be read that they’re telling him essentially “Get out of here, baldy! Go up to heaven like Elijah, baldy!” So in effect, they’re also mocking Elijah, and mocking how God translated Elijah. They’re not just teasing a bald old man.